How do Assessments Affect the Curriculum and Quality of Instruction?
Ruqayya El-Asmar
ERIC
Farr, R. Tone, B. (1994). Theory meets practice in language arts assessment. ERIC.
Summary:
Public concern about student achievement led to the development of testing measures that held schools and teachers accountable for what they believed should be emphasized in schools. This article argues that the result of these assessments was the narrowing of the curriculum. Teachers studied the tests to see what their students would be expected to know and what they were expected to teach. They used the tests as models for the curriculum, and focused on what the tests focused on; reading and math. This led to “teaching to the test.” Portfolios and performance assessments are some alternatives to these methods, but research shows that the public is not as satisfied with these methods. They prefer to have multiple-choice testing because they want to have scores and numbers that will allow them to compare different schools and their students across the nations.
Reflection:
Schools are only being held accountable for certain subjects, and I think it is natural for teachers and students to focus on those subjects. This naturally leads to the narrowing of the curriculum. Teachers want to know what their evaluations will be based on and what their students will be expected to know, and so they study the tests and teach what will be tested. I can also understand the public's desire to have scores to compare schools, but I do not think that these scores should be too influential in assessing teachers and their students.
Editorial
Cochran-Smith, M. (2005). Teacher education and the outcomes trap. Journal of Teacher Education. 56, 5, 411-417. Academic Search Complete.
Summary:
There has been an increasing focus on teachers and their “outcomes.” These outcomes are the measures of their success within the classroom, and have recently become more based upon the test scores of their students. The goal of teaching is not to raise test scores. School should focus on learning, not simply preparing their students to pass narrowly defined tests. The purpose of school and the role of teachers as they are viewed by society needs to change. Schools and teachers should not be judged on test scores and on their ability “to produce students who can pass the test.” Students not only need to develop the basic skills that they will be tested for, but they must also develop a deeper knowledge and understanding of the material. Civic education, science, social studies, and the arts need to be emphasized and become a bigger priority in schools and a bigger priority in the classroom.
Reflection:
With the increasing focus on accountability and assessments, there is more pressure on teachers and the test scores of their students. Because of this pressure, teachers are focusing on the basic skills that will be tested, and not focusing on critical thinking and problem solving that will provide students with a deeper understanding and knowledge. The idea of what school is all about has changed, and the focus is not on learning but on improving test scores.
Summary:
Test scores do not give you an idea for how a school operates or if it is really successful. Children are fed an endless supply of math and reading test-prep worksheets, and creative thinking and problem solving is not a priority in the classroom. Those on the edge of passing or failing tests receive more instruction time in reading and math, even if they must be taken out of other classes for this extra preparation. The students that are definitely going to pass and the “hopeless” cases are ignored and not much time is put into them. One California superintendent was asked why her district was no longer going to be having any whale-watching trips. She replied, "Kids are not tested on whale watching, so they're not going whale watching." What does this mean for other subjects such as social studies, art, music, and other subject that are not tested? Are they cast aside in the efforts to improve tests scores? Teachers spend time giving their students evaluations, which are basically shorter versions of the tests they will be facing at the end of the year. Improvement can be monitored, and teaching time can be adjusted based on the needs. The public is happy with improving test scores, even if this does not mean the school is successful, or that their children are receiving a good education.
Reflection:
I think that it is important to realize that high test scores does not necessarily mean that a school is successful. If students are continuously being drilled with test-preparation worksheets and are only focusing on math and reading, it is not a successful school. School should not only focus on improving test scores and disregard all other types of learning. I think that tests should be similar to the preexisting curriculum in schools, and these tests should not lead to teachers changing their use of classroom time to fit the test.
Scholarly Article
Anderson, L.W. (2009). Upper elementary grades bear the brunt of accountability. 90, 6, 413-418. Academic Search Complete.
Summary:
In this article, Anderson argues that teachers need to stop blaming accountability for the narrowing of the curriculum, quality of instruction, and use of instruction time. While teachers claim that the standardized tests lead to the narrowing of the curriculum, Anderson disagrees and argues that reading and mathematics have always dominated the curriculum while science and social studies have been pushed aside. In one study, Anderson shows that before accountability was implemented, social studies and science each took up about 5% of instruction time, and that little has changed after the implementation of accountability.
Anderson also argues that memorization and the decrease in critical thinking and problem solving in the classroom is not the product of accountability. She found that for the past half a century, teachers have been moving towards memorization and multiple-choice testing, and that it is not a result of accountability.
Her final argument in favor of accountability is that instructional time is not greatly diverted toward “teaching to the test.” One average, most teachers claim that they spend three to five weeks in test preparation. Most teachers also said that this did not lead them to abandon the curriculum and neglect the subjects that were not tested. Reflection:
I think that this article is interesting because it counters all the other arguments I have seen about assessments and their effect on the curriculum. Anderson argues that teachers blame accountability for many of the problems that schools have been facing for the past half century. She argues that the narrowing of the curriculum was happening long before the implementation of accountability. I find it hard to believe that 3-5 weeks of test preparation does not disrupt the curriculum. I think that teachers are drawn to multiple choice testing because they want students to be familiar with this type of testing because of how accountable they are for the results. I disagree with this argument and I think that assessments naturally leads to the narrowing of the curriculum.
How do Assessments Affect the Curriculum and Quality of Instruction?
Ruqayya El-Asmar
ERIC
Farr, R. Tone, B. (1994). Theory meets practice in language arts assessment. ERIC.
Summary:
Public concern about student achievement led to the development of testing measures that held schools and teachers accountable for what they believed should be emphasized in schools. This article argues that the result of these assessments was the narrowing of the curriculum. Teachers studied the tests to see what their students would be expected to know and what they were expected to teach. They used the tests as models for the curriculum, and focused on what the tests focused on; reading and math. This led to “teaching to the test.” Portfolios and performance assessments are some alternatives to these methods, but research shows that the public is not as satisfied with these methods. They prefer to have multiple-choice testing because they want to have scores and numbers that will allow them to compare different schools and their students across the nations.
Reflection:
Schools are only being held accountable for certain subjects, and I think it is natural for teachers and students to focus on those subjects. This naturally leads to the narrowing of the curriculum. Teachers want to know what their evaluations will be based on and what their students will be expected to know, and so they study the tests and teach what will be tested. I can also understand the public's desire to have scores to compare schools, but I do not think that these scores should be too influential in assessing teachers and their students.
Editorial
Cochran-Smith, M. (2005). Teacher education and the outcomes trap. Journal of Teacher Education. 56, 5, 411-417. Academic Search Complete.
Summary:
There has been an increasing focus on teachers and their “outcomes.” These outcomes are the measures of their success within the classroom, and have recently become more based upon the test scores of their students. The goal of teaching is not to raise test scores. School should focus on learning, not simply preparing their students to pass narrowly defined tests. The purpose of school and the role of teachers as they are viewed by society needs to change. Schools and teachers should not be judged on test scores and on their ability “to produce students who can pass the test.” Students not only need to develop the basic skills that they will be tested for, but they must also develop a deeper knowledge and understanding of the material. Civic education, science, social studies, and the arts need to be emphasized and become a bigger priority in schools and a bigger priority in the classroom.
Reflection:
With the increasing focus on accountability and assessments, there is more pressure on teachers and the test scores of their students. Because of this pressure, teachers are focusing on the basic skills that will be tested, and not focusing on critical thinking and problem solving that will provide students with a deeper understanding and knowledge. The idea of what school is all about has changed, and the focus is not on learning but on improving test scores.
Analysis
Bracey, G.W. (2007). Growing an achievement gap. Education Week. . 27, 2, 26. Academic Search Premier.
Summary:
Test scores do not give you an idea for how a school operates or if it is really successful. Children are fed an endless supply of math and reading test-prep worksheets, and creative thinking and problem solving is not a priority in the classroom. Those on the edge of passing or failing tests receive more instruction time in reading and math, even if they must be taken out of other classes for this extra preparation. The students that are definitely going to pass and the “hopeless” cases are ignored and not much time is put into them. One California superintendent was asked why her district was no longer going to be having any whale-watching trips. She replied, "Kids are not tested on whale watching, so they're not going whale watching." What does this mean for other subjects such as social studies, art, music, and other subject that are not tested? Are they cast aside in the efforts to improve tests scores? Teachers spend time giving their students evaluations, which are basically shorter versions of the tests they will be facing at the end of the year. Improvement can be monitored, and teaching time can be adjusted based on the needs. The public is happy with improving test scores, even if this does not mean the school is successful, or that their children are receiving a good education.
Reflection:
I think that it is important to realize that high test scores does not necessarily mean that a school is successful. If students are continuously being drilled with test-preparation worksheets and are only focusing on math and reading, it is not a successful school. School should not only focus on improving test scores and disregard all other types of learning. I think that tests should be similar to the preexisting curriculum in schools, and these tests should not lead to teachers changing their use of classroom time to fit the test.
Scholarly Article
Anderson, L.W. (2009). Upper elementary grades bear the brunt of accountability. 90, 6, 413-418. Academic Search Complete.
Summary:
In this article, Anderson argues that teachers need to stop blaming accountability for the narrowing of the curriculum, quality of instruction, and use of instruction time. While teachers claim that the standardized tests lead to the narrowing of the curriculum, Anderson disagrees and argues that reading and mathematics have always dominated the curriculum while science and social studies have been pushed aside. In one study, Anderson shows that before accountability was implemented, social studies and science each took up about 5% of instruction time, and that little has changed after the implementation of accountability.
Anderson also argues that memorization and the decrease in critical thinking and problem solving in the classroom is not the product of accountability. She found that for the past half a century, teachers have been moving towards memorization and multiple-choice testing, and that it is not a result of accountability.
Her final argument in favor of accountability is that instructional time is not greatly diverted toward “teaching to the test.” One average, most teachers claim that they spend three to five weeks in test preparation. Most teachers also said that this did not lead them to abandon the curriculum and neglect the subjects that were not tested.
Reflection:
I think that this article is interesting because it counters all the other arguments I have seen about assessments and their effect on the curriculum. Anderson argues that teachers blame accountability for many of the problems that schools have been facing for the past half century. She argues that the narrowing of the curriculum was happening long before the implementation of accountability. I find it hard to believe that 3-5 weeks of test preparation does not disrupt the curriculum. I think that teachers are drawn to multiple choice testing because they want students to be familiar with this type of testing because of how accountable they are for the results. I disagree with this argument and I think that assessments naturally leads to the narrowing of the curriculum.